PGE's coal fired Boardman Power Plant. Photo from Ted Timmons

The news must have landed at PGE like a ton of coal.

Oregon DEQ says its looking at three options for an early closure of PGE’s coal-fired power plant at Boardman. They call on the utility to spend millions more to keep the plant running, or shutting it down a lot earlier than PGE wants.

The Big Picture

To see where this is going, let’s back up for a moment. There’s only one approved plan – so far – that allows PGE to continue operating the Boardman power plant. It allows the plant to generate electricity by burning coal until 2040. But PGE would have to install about $500 million in new pollution controls to bring down emissions of nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide.

This doesn’t include any controls on greenhouse gases. None are required for now, but pretty much everyone expects they will be required in the near future. Since Boardman is the state’s biggest single source of greenhouse gas, the costs of new controls could be substantial.

PGE, no surprise, would like to avoid having to pay for all that. So earlier this year it proposed a plan where it would shut down Boardman by 2020, and only have to spend about $40 million on pollution controls. That proposal was rejected by DEQ a couple of weeks ago.

DEQ’s Options

The 2020 Plan: Boardman shuts down by the end of 2020, and PGE spends $320 million on reducing pollution.

The 2018 Plan: The plant closes by the end of 2018, and PGE pays about $100 million for new controls.

The 2015-2016 Plan: Boardman shuts down in late 2015 or early 2016. The cost of pollution controls drops to $35 million

DEQ says it chose these options because it thinks they can be approved by the EPA. It’s now taking comments from the public, plans on holding hearings in September, with a goal of approving a final plan before the end of the year.

Environmental Reaction

Oregon Sierra Club, which has been leading the campaign to shut down Boardman, is praising DEQ for the new proposals. The group wants Boardman closed in 2014. While DEQ doesn’t go that far, it does get us closer.

In a statement, Cesia Kearns of the Coal Free Oregon Campaign writes:

“The options DEQ has proposed demonstrate clearly that PGE can and should phase-out their dirty and dangerous Boardman coal-fired power plant earlier than the 2020 they are currently proposing. We already know that it is better for public health and the environment in Oregon if Boardman is phased out soon. The options offered by DEQ today further detail how it will also be cheaper to phase the plant out sooner than PGE is currently considering.”

PGE Reaction

The utility is not happy with the DEQ options. It wants to keep Boardman running until 2020, but at a lower cost. It says it needs the extra time to plan and develop cleaner sources of electricity to replace the plant.

According to PGE President and CEO Jim Piro:

“We put forward a plan for Boardman that we believe reached a good balance between cost, risk and environmental benefits. We’ll do a complete analysis, but we’re disappointed that DEQ didn’t allow that plan to proceed. On the face of it we believe the new options DEQ put forward today may reflect an extreme interpretation of federal rules that won’t make sense for our customers or our state. We want to work with DEQ to find a better way to transition this resource around the 2020 timeframe.”

The Next Steps:

DEQ sets up an advisory committee to do further study, which starts meeting in July. An updated version of this plan would be ready for public hearings in September. But the agency is taking comments now and they can be emailed to, deqoptionspge@deq.state.or.us.

For More Information:

Draft DEQ Proposal for Early Shutdown of the PGE Boardman Plant

PGE Reaction

Sierra Club Reaction

I’ve written about these toxic chemicals before. They’re called “persistent pollutants” because it takes years or even decades before they break down in the environment. Over time they get into the food chain and become a threat to the health of people, animals and fish.

The latest news is that DEQ says it now has a better idea of where these chemicals come from and how they get into Oregon’s waterways. It’s also suggesting ways to reduce the level of these chemicals in the environment, so they pose less of a danger.

What’s the best way to control them? DEQ says the answer is prevention.

Some ideas under consideration:

• Banning some of the pollutants.
• Requiring businesses to design products that use less of the chemicals.
• Phasing out some of the chemicals when safer alternatives become available.
• Educating the public on the risks of these chemicals, and the best way to dispose of products that contain them.

Where do they come from?

• Household products such as medications, disinfectants, perfumes and the non-stick coating used in cookware.
• Flame retardants, known as PBDEs are used in electronics and furniture. Oregon and Washington have banned the most common types of PBDEs.
• Pesticides, whether they’re used on the farm, in forests, or on the lawns and gardens of our homes.
• Legacy pollutants, such as DDT, are still a problem even though they may have been banned decades ago.

What’s next?

In the coming year, DEQ will set “trigger levels” for these pollutants in our wastewater. 52 of Oregon’s largest wastewater systems will have to monitor how much of these chemicals are being discharged into our rivers and streams. If a chemical goes above the “trigger level”, officials will have to design a plan to reduce it in the wastewater. These plans are due by July of 2011.

Today, DEQ released a report on persistent pollutants to the Legislature. This worked is mandated under Senate Bill 737, approved by lawmakers in 2007.

The prevention measures outlined in the report may require new rules, or new laws, to make sure they’re carried out.

For More Information:

Oregon DEQ: Addressing Priority Persistent Pollutants in Oregon’s Water

Related Story:

Oregon’s Dirty Dozens

But Mary Peveto of Neighbors for Clean Air tells me there’s a lot of frustration after what people heard at last night’s meeting put on by Oregon DEQ.

DEQ is proposing new benchmarks for acceptable levels of three air pollutants – lead, manganese and ethyl benzene. New studies show these toxins are more dangerous than we thought. DEQ now says the levels of these pollutants that are considered okay need to be lowered.

Peveto and other critics say DEQ’s approach fails to look at pollution hot spots, places where toxins in our air can spike to high levels over short periods. Instead, DEQ looks at regional and statewide averages. But air quality can vary widely within a county. For example, people who live near freeways or industrial sites may worse air quality that people living in the suburbs.

In an e-mail to supporters, Peveto says concerns raised at the meeting were answered by comments that were more about process than substance.

She writes:

Last night, we saw that we still have work to do.

Specifically, we need to demand that our state take action to protect public health by addressing the short term exposures to dangerous pollution experienced by those who live in toxic hot spots.  In a city which reveres its beloved “urban growth boundary” this is not an isolated issue of one neighborhood.  In fact 63 schools rank in the top 10% of schools in the nation with the most dangerous air quality due to proximity to sources of dangerous industrial air pollution.

Peveto has posted a fuller version of what happened on her blog, PDXAIR.

Related Story:

A NW Portlander’s Fight For Clean Air

PGE's coal-fired power plant near Boardman, OR. Photo from Brian Pasko.

The campaign to shut down Oregon’s only coal-fired power plant by 2014 just got some big news.

The Department of Environmental Quality says it will recommend that the state reject PGE’s proposal to close the Boardman power plant by 2020, and take some additional time to study alternatives for an early shut down.

“We support an early shut down and we’re interested in exploring a range of options,” says Air Quality Administrator Andy Ginsburg. “Accepting PGE’s current petition would lock in only one approach as the starting point in a rule-making and we believe that additional options should considered before rule-making begins.”

That’s not the same thing as endorsing a 2014 closure. But it does put the possibility before DEQ in a very official way, and gives environmental groups a new opportunity to push for a shut down by 2014.

Originally, Boardman was supposed to keep operating until 2040. The plant is Oregon’s largest single source of greenhouse gases, the pollution that causes regional haze, and a major contributor to acid rain in the Columbia River Gorge.

But new EPA regulations on haze forced the state to take action. Last summer, DEQ adopted rules that would force PGE to reduce the plant’s nitrogen oxide emissions by 46 percent in 2011, reduce sulfur dioxide emissions by 80 percent in 2014, and further reduce nitrogen oxide emissions from 46 to 84 percent in 2017.

Those pollution controls came with a hefty price tag – about $470 million. It turned out to be more than PGE was willing to pay. Earlier this year the utility said it would close Boardman by the end of 2020, in exchange for not having to spend all that money.

When the DEQ Commission meets June 17 in Lakeview, the staff will present its recommendation to deny PGE’s offer.  That would be followed by a new round of rule-making, and then a new proposal for regional haze regulations.

During those six months, DEQ could change its mind and decide to support PGE’s 2020 closure date. But 2014 supporters will have several chances to make their case. The first chance comes at the June 17 meeting when the Commission will take comments from the public. If you can’t make it to the meeting in Lakeview, you can testify via teleconference from DEQ offices in Portland, Eugene, Bend, Medford, Pendleton and The Dalles.

As the rule-making progresses, there will be other public meetings held around the state.

For more information on the public comment process see…

Oregon DEQ: DEQ to Propose Denial of PGE’s Petition to Amend Regional Haze Rules

Related Stories:

Standing Room Only For DEQ Meeting On Boardman Coal Plant
Clean Up Or Shut Down: New Pressure On The Boardman Coal Plant
More Views On PGE’s Early Shut Down Of Boardman

The NW Portland resident had just typed the name of her daughter’s school into a national database on toxic air quality. Much to her surprise – and horror – the school was ranked as one of the worst in the country.

That “eye opening” moment was about a year ago. Since then Peveto has become something of a self taught expert on air quality, started up the PDXAIR blog where she writes about the issue, and co-founded Neighbors For Clean Air to raise awareness of problems.

Her newest mission? To convince Oregonians to get involved in making the air we breathe cleaner and healthier.

I spoke with Peveto because next week, DEQ will hold an important public meeting on setting new statewide benchmarks for three air toxins – lead, manganese and ethyl benzene. Based on new information about the health dangers of these chemicals, DEQ is proposing tougher benchmarks for all of them.

While supportive of tougher standards, Peveto is critical of the state’s overall approach. There’s only one air monitoring station in all of Portland that measures these kinds of toxins. Samples are taken every six days and averaged out over a year.

“This won’t help people at the highest risk of exposure,” says Peveto. “Let’s look who’s at greatest risk and alleviate their risk.”

Peveto wants to see the state do a better job of monitoring hot spots, places where toxic pollution can spike to unhealthy levels even though the region-wide quality still looks okay.  In her part of NW Portland, neighbors are worried about emissions from the ESCO refinery and petroleum storage tanks. Elsewhere, the problem might be high levels of toxins from traffic on nearby freeways.

She also wants benchmarks that do a better job of protecting the health of children. Dozens of Portland schools are located next or near industrial areas where students may be exposed to short term spikes in air toxins.

Neighbors For Clean Air has a online petition drive to get support for the changes Peveto is advocating.

Gregg Lande with DEQ says industrial sources of toxic air is just one of the issues under consideration. “It’s not just about one business or sector,” says Lande. “It’s about a lot of things that are contributing.”

“Industry is just a piece of the problem,” he adds.

The DEQ meeting on the new benchmarks will be held Tuesday, May 18 starting at 6:00pm. The location is ODOT offices at 123 NW Flanders, Portland.

For more information about the proposed benchmarks see:

Oregon Air Toxics Program

To see the original USA Today coverage on air quality near schools see:

Toxic Air and America’s Schools

According to the NW Examiner, DEQ told residents almost a year ago that air pollution from the foundry was “only a sliver of the area’s air pollution.” But now DEQ is saying that it’s much higher, and for people who live close to ESCO, 95% of the toxins they breathe come from the foundry.

Another surprising fact from the paper, emissions of lead from ESCO increased 32-fold from 2001 to 2007.

For more information see the NW Examiner website and look for the March edition. The story is on the front page and was written by Paul Koberstein of Cascadia Times. And a big thanks to Mary Peveto, who runs the PDXAIR blog. I came across this story because she was tweeting about it.

Along the Willamette River Water Trail. Photo from Oregon Parks and Recreation.

If we’re ever going to restore the Willamette River basin, it’s going to cost a huge chunk of money.

Anywhere from about $593 million to $1.2 billion, according to Oregon DEQ.

In a new report, DEQ says decades of farming, logging and urban development have degraded the basins streams and rivers.

DEQ put together this report for the EPA, which collects information on how much it would cost to meet the nation’s water quality goals.

Here’s what DEQ found:

• About 96,000 acres may need restoring. Most of them, about 70%, are agricultural lands. But it also includes land inside urban growth boundaries.
• The money would need to be spent on removing land from agriculture and restoring it as habitat along streams and rivers. It also includes protecting waterways with fencing and improving in-stream habitat. A good portion of the money, maybe as high as 30%, would be used to pay rent to landowners so that state officials could have access to do the restoration work.
• The biggest problems include water temperatures that are too warm and too much sediment in the rivers and streams. Restoring the basin could eventually lower heat pollution by about 12.9 billion kilocalories daily. (A kilocalorie is the amount of energy it takes to heat one gram of water by one degree Celsius.) Planting shade trees along streams and rivers are an important part of cooling the water.

For more information:

Cost Estimate to Restore Riparian Forest Buffers and Improve Stream Habitat in the Willamette Basin, Oregon

LNG pipeline protesters at a December 2009 rally in Portland.

Although this is listed on my events story of the day, it’s worth a new mention. Oregon DEQ is holding a public meeting tonight in Astoria about the Bradwood Landing LNG project.

Also, I’ve learned a little bit more about the Wyden-Merkley LNG bill.

But first, the big meeting tonight. Oregon DEQ plays an important role in determining if the Bradwood Landing LNG project can be built. It has to review permits for Clean Air, Clean Water, among other things. It has to work with NOAA Fisheries to see if the project will do too much damage to endangered salmon in the Columbia River.

As Dan Serres with Columbia Riverkeeper puts it, “DEQ can stop this project and protect Oregon.” Serres expects the meeting to draw quite a crowd, perhaps 100 people or more.

Reps from DEQ will be explaining to people how the permitting process works, how long it will take, and when it expects to hold more formal hearings. But expect some enthusiastic advice from the crowd on how DEQ should decide this issue.

Wyden-Merkley LNG Bill

In yesterday’s post I raised the question that if the Wyden-Merkley LNG bill passes, will it force Bradwood Landing and the Jordan Cove LNG projects to start all over?

Tom Towslee, with Wyden’s staff in Portland says the answer to that is – no. Bradwood and Jordan Cove have already been approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and Towslee says, “You can’t unring that bell.”

Wyden and Merkley are trying to take away FERC’s authority to approve LNG projects, and return that power to state authorities.

Even if the bill doesn’t pass, Oregon still has considerable power over LNG.  As noted earlier in this story, any LNG project has to get several permits from the state.

Both states started nearly identical programs at the beginning of 2009 and reported their yearly results today.

In Oregon, we turned in 18.9 million pounds of leftover computers, monitors and televisions. That’s about five pounds per Oregonian. Washington did even better. Residents recycled 38.5 million pounds of electronics, or nearly six pounds per person.

Both states say the response far exceeded their expectations.

Kathy Kiwala of Oregon DEQ says the agency suspected there might be some pent-up demand in the state. “Given that e-waste is the fastest-growing waste stream in America, coupled with the rate at which people purchase new electronics, it’s not surprising there’s a glut of e-waste just waiting to be recycled,” says Kiwala. She thinks the 2009 switch to digital TV also gave the program a boost as many people got rid of their older analog television sets.

Meanwhile some interesting info-nuggets from each state.

Oregon:

• We recycled roughly 52,000 pounds of computers, monitors and televisions each day
• Have kept nearly 1.2 million pounds of lead out of landfills and incinerators
• Prevented the release of greenhouse gases equivalent to the annual emissions of more than 34,000 cars

Washington:

• 22.3 million pounds of televisions
• 12. 3 million pounds of monitors
• 3.9 million pounds of computers

The E-cycles programs in both states are free to donors, but paid for by the electronics industry.

For more information:

Oregon E-Cycles

E-Cycle Washington

In some cases, the leaks were so widespread, they contaminated the drinking water for homes, businesses and even a school.

Of the 13 sites, DEQ has announced actions at four locations:

DEQ wants to upgrade the water treatment system in Spray. Photo from Oregon DEQ.

Spray, Wheeler County: In one of the worst cases reported so far, a leaking gasoline tank at the Lone Elk Market has caused drinking water problems for this small town in Eastern Oregon since 1988. After discovering the problem, DEQ has removed the tank, replaced drinking wells and installed a new water treatment system. In 2008, DEQ discovered even more contaminated groundwater that was moving toward the wells.

What’s Next? DEQ wants to spend $440,000 to remove contaminated soil and groundwater, and to upgrade the water treatment system.

DEQ investigators at the Keno site in 2002. Photo from Oregon DEQ.

Keno, Klamath County: In 1995, DEQ tests of groundwater found widespread contamination from underground tanks at the former Keno Garage. The department installed and still operates carbon treatment systems on drinking water supplies for the Keno Elementary School as well as several homes and businesses.

What’s Next? DEQ will use $350,000 to connect the school to a community water system, allowing them to stop the carbon filtration. They hope to add nearby homes and businesses as well.

Fort Rock, Lake County: Leaks from the underground tanks at the Fort Rock General Store led to a DEQ clean up of the site which included removing the old tanks and installing new ones. That was followed by replacing some contaminated drinking wells. In 2006, DEQ found at least two other wells had been contaminated, too.

What’s Next? Spending about $195,000 to see if the contamination has spread further, and for additional clean up at the site.

Yamhill, Yamhill County: DEQ has been working at cleaning up this site since it was first reported in 1988. The original leaks came from underground tanks at Yamhill Station. DEQ responded by removing the tanks and replacing them with above ground tanks. In 2006, it was discovered that those tanks were also leaking.

What’s Next: DEQ wants to remove contaminated soil and to conduct tests to see how far the contamination has spread. Price tag? About $280,000.